4
Asked for by forensic analysts Authorized by Republican Congress/President Researched by NRC of National Academies Created by an Act signed by President Lincoln in 1863 200 members have won Nobel Prize Other National Academies of Engineering and Medicine Authored by Committee Co-chaired by US Court of Appeals Judge & Statistician

17
New York Dept of Forensic Investigation LAPD Connecticut Oklahoma Misconduct and Falsifications could be the basis for a criminal prosecution File Missing after Errors found Major Deficiencies in Dr. Henry Lees Lab Joyce Gilchrist, Lab Supervisor, Dismissed for Falsifying Evidence

20
With the exception of nuclear DNA analysis,… no forensic method has been rigorously shown to have the capacity to consistently, and with a high degree of certainty, demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source. – NAS Report

21
Hair Bite Marks Fingerprints Absent DNA testing, No individualization possible Could Accurate Continuing dispute over the value and scientific validity of comparing and identifying bite marks Studies demonstrated that identification decisions on same fingerprint can change solely by presenting the print in a different context

22
Arson DNA Despite the paucity of research, some arson investigators continue to make unsupported determinations about whether or not a particular fire was set Mislabeling & Losing Samples Misinterpreting data Underestimating probability of family match LCN

24
Possible sources of error and statistical data Evidence of analysis and the chemists notes Some laboratories might mention the tests that were conducted

25
From a scientific perspective, this style of reporting is often inadequate, because it may not provide enough detail to enable a peer or other courtroom participant to understand and, if needed, question the sampling scheme, process(es) of analysis, or interpretation - NAS Report

40
Melendez-Diaz v. Mass,129 S.Ct. 2527 (2009) (Confrontation re Lab Analysis) Nor is it evident that what [the State] calls neutral scientific testing is as neutral or as reliable as [it] suggests. Forensic evidence is not uniquely immune from the risk of manipulation

41
The majority of [laboratories producing forensic evidence] are administered by law enforcement agencies, such as police departments, where the laboratory administrator reports to the head of the agency

42
Because forensic scientists often are driven in their work by a need to answer a particular question related to the issues of a particular case, they sometimes face pressure to sacrifice appropriate methodology for the sake of expediency

43
A forensic analyst responding to a request from a law enforcement official may feel pressure-or have an incentive-to alter the evidence in a manner favorable to the prosecution

44
Confrontation is designed to weed out not only the fraudulent analyst, but the incompetent one as well Citing the NAS Report concerning problems of subjectivity, bias, and unreliability of common forensic tests such as latent fingerprint analysis, pattern/impression analysis, and toolmark and firearms analysis

45
There is wide variability across forensic science disciplines with regard to techniques, methodologies, reliability, types and numbers of potential errors, research, general acceptability, and published material – Justice Scalia quoting NAS Report Contrary to respondents and the dissents suggestion, there is little reason to believe that confrontation will be useless in testing analysts honesty, proficiency, and methodology-the features that are commonly the focus in the cross-examination of experts – Justice Scalia

46
Brady Deficient Performance Anything the prosecution didn't disclose that Scalia mentioned as a possible subject of cross– examination is Brady Everything that trial counsel didnt request in discovery or use as a basis for cross- examination is deficient performance

47
US v. Oliveira (D. Mass 2010) The NAS Report called for sweeping changes in the presentation and production of evidence....

48
In the past, the admissibility of this kind of evidence was effectively presumed, largely because of pedigree-the fact that it has been admitted for decades.

49
As such, counsel rarely challenged it, and if it were challenged, it was rarely excluded or limited ….

50
The NAS report suggests a different calculus-that admissibility of such evidence ought not to be presumed; that it has to be carefully examined in each case….